I would also note that the assertion that there was “no proof” of rape was and is so seriously mistaken that it amounts to a corruption of language and thought. This is also a characteristic of an advanced state of moral degradation.

Like this:

I hope commenter “GK” is not a prosecutor. Buried in one of his comments, addressing the issue of preparing for trial on behalf of a criminal defendant, which involves of course the interviewing and summoning of witnesses, he says:

“Just tie the witnesses down with your own investigator first. Of course the prosecution will try to “flip” cooperating witnesses.”

Now, I kind of glossed over this part at first, not realizing its importance. In my defense, it’s not always easy to spot fundamentally disordered thinking. It has an unexpectedness about it.

GK is saying here that “of course” the prosecution will pressure witnesses to testify the way they want them to. This is a frightening mindset. The prosecution has no business doing anything of the kind.

In the first place and on a practical level, it is a “tactic”, if you want to dignify it with that word, that cannot be fairly countered by the defense. The defense doesn’t have the power to arrest and prosecute people; the prosecution does. In a witness pressuring contest, the prosecution wins. What sort of trial would there be where the prosecution engaged in this kind of tactic? A hopelessly perverted one. An obviously unfair and unconstitutional one.